Re: Aerospace Projects Review updates

From: Herb Schaltegger (herb.schaltegger_at_gmail.com.invalid)
Date: 12/06/04 

Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2004 07:54:49 -0600

In article <41B46BAE.1010008@ix.netcomSPAMBLOK.com>,
 Scott Lowther <scottlowther@ix.netcomSPAMBLOK.com> wrote:

> Bleating about the insurance industry is just bunk.

It's not "bleating" -

"[M]edical malpractice premiums charged by insurance companies do not
correspond to increases or decreases in payouts, which have been
steady for 30 years. Rather, premiums rise and fall in concert with
the state of the economy." Medical Malpractice Insurance: Stable
Losses/Unstable Rates, Americans for Insurance Reform, under the
direction of J. Robert Hunter (Director of Insurance for the Consumer
Federation of America, former Federal Insurance Administrator and
Texas Insurance Commissioner) October 10, 2002.
 
"[The] insurance industry has played a role in the continuing
limitations on accessible and affordable insurance coverage for the
health care providers . . . " Final Report of the Insurance
Availability and Medical Malpractice Industry Committee, a bipartisan
committee of the West Virginia Legislature, issued January 7, 2003.

And most tellingly:
 
"I don't like to hear insurance-company executives say it's the tort
system - it's self inflicted.'" - Donald J. Zuk, Chief Executive of
Scpie Holdings Inc., a leading malpractice insurer in California, Wall
Street Journal, June 24, 2002.

> Doctors would not
> *need* to pay malpractice insurance if they were not gettign sued for
> every little mistake.

How many claims of medical negligence have YOU researched personally?
Because I've researched hundreds in the last 8 years alone. Of those
hundreds, we've chosen to pursue maybe 8 or 9. The truth of the
matter is that doctors AREN'T being sued for "every little mistake."
That's more bull*** propaganda put out by ultra-cons and the
insurance industry which supports and profits from them.

"Legal professionals, legislators, and the public in general often
receive a distorted picture of medical negligence litigation based on
selective reporting of cases by the mass media and by propaganda
efforts of groups advocating changes to American tort laws." Medical
Negligence, the Litigation Process and Jury Verdicts in Medical
Malpractice Cases: Implications for Indiana, Neil Vidmar, Ph.D.,
Russell M. Robinson II Professor of law at Duke Law School, December
2, 2002.

Besides which, a study done by the Harvard Medical Practice Study
Group determined that for every 8 potential medical malpractice
claims, only 1 claim was actually filed. Patients, Doctors, and
Lawyers: Medical Injury, Malpractice Litigation, and Patient
Compensation in New York, Harvard Medical Practice Study Group
(Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1990).

In fact, even of the cases which in suit IS filed, most of them in my
experience result in defense verdicts. Even those which result in
verdicts for the Plaintiff (maybe 20% of those actually filed) usually
have relative low payouts given the damages inflicted by the
negligence:

Despite questionable anecdotal evidence of excessive jury verdicts,
the hard facts show that malpractice awards are rarely excessive. The
median malpractice payout for 2000 is $125,000, according to the
National Practitioner's Databank.
 
"Not only has there been no 'explosion' in medical malpractice payouts
at any time during the last 30 years . . .payments (in constant
dollars) have been extremely stable and virtually flat since the
mid-1980s." Medical Malpractice Insurance: Stable Losses/Unstable
Rates, Americans for Insurance Reform, October 10, 2002.

> Lawyers have convinced the gullible that doctors
> are supposed to be perfect. They aren't, never have been, never will be.
> People will never stop dying.

No, they haven't. Here's a concept you should study up on: "standard
of care" - that's the key. All anyone ever asks a doctor to do is
follow and uphold the standard of care for whatever service is
provided. And that standard of care has to be proven by other experts
in the field - e.g., doctors, not lawyers, not judges, not
hypothetical experts on the outside looking in.

As a matter of fact, that's the same measure used to judge ANY
professional in any field in a claim of professional malpractice. And
in practice it's substantially more lenient than that used for
measuring negligence for ordinary activities, which measures your
actions or failures to act by comparison to what a reasonably prudent
person would do under the circumstances.

The reason the professional negligence standard ends up being more
lenient in practice is because if enough doctors decide it's okay to
be negligent and screw around, then the habit of being negligent and
screwing around BECOMES the "standard of care!" Do you get it? The
professions defines its own level of competence! Talk about the fox
guarding the chicken coop!

> If a doctor makes a mistake, determine if it was negligent. If not, move
> on. If it was... arrest him and/or withdraw his liscence. But this
> lawsuit mentality is disastrous. Why do lawyers sue doctors who make
> mistakes, but not murderers? Here's why: doctors have money. It's just
> that simple.

No, it's not that simple. 

-- 
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity."
   ~ Robert A. Heinlein
<http://www.angryherb.net>
Quantcast